Tue Jun 25, 2013, 01:03 PM

Greenwald does not have a timeline problem. The NY Times as the story broke:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/how-edward-j-snowden-orchestrated-a-blockbuster-story.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

Cryptic Overtures and a Clandestine Meeting Gave Birth to a Blockbuster Story
By CHARLIE SAVAGE and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: June 10, 2013

1) January 2013: Snowden reaches out to documentary filmaker Laura Poitras
2) February 2013: Greenwald receives "an enigmatic e-mail identifying himself as a reader and saying he wanted to communicate about a potential story using encryption."
3) February 2013: Greenwald receives encryption software but doesn't complete the installation process.
4) March 2013: Poitras reaches out to Greenwald to discuss the issue. "At that point, neither knew his name yet."
5) Late April or early May: Greenwald and Snowden begin communicating via encrypted email.
6) Last week of May: Greenwald flies to New York to meet with Guardian editors and then he and Poitras fly to Hong Kong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/25/msnbcs-reid-raises-questions-about-guardians-glenn-greenwald/

It was only in May — and not before — that Snowden told [Greenwald] who he was, who he worked for (at that point he identified himself as affiliated with the NSA) and what sort of documents he had to share, Greenwald says. It wasn’t until June — when Greenwald visited Snowden in Hong Kong — that Snowden told him he worked specifically for Booz Allen, Greenwald adds.
“We had early conversations about setting up encryption, so we worked early on to set that up,” Greenwald says. “We didn’t work on any documents. I didn’t even know Edward Snowden’s name or where he worked until after he was in Hong Kong with the documents. Anyone who is claiming that somehow I worked with him to get those documents or helped him is just lying.”

66 replies, 6816 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

66 replies	Author	Time	Post
Greenwald does not have a timeline problem. The NY Times as the story broke: (Original post)	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	OP
I never thought Greenwald would lie about the timeline like that	senseandsensibility	Jun 2013	#1
oh senseandsensibility you are so right!!!	tartan2	Jun 2013	#24
Kick.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#2
are you trying to confuse people with facts??	grasswire	Jun 2013	#3
It's a cryin' shame that DUers are now capable of being confused with facts.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#4
We've Been Dumbed-Down Considerably Over The Years...	WillyT	Jun 2013	#8
That's the problem with a big tent	OnyxCollie	Jun 2013	#23
sometimes vermin crawls under the tent flaps	frylock	Jun 2013	#36
I guess the attack posse will have to pivot back to the "boxes in the garage"	Vinnie From Indy	Jun 2013	#5
I still think there's milage in the "Poledancing girlfriend" angle - she needs more investigation.	leveymg	Jun 2013	#51
We've already known for two weeks about Greenwald's "timeline problem"	Jarla	Jun 2013	#6
People are insinuating that he knew who Snowden was IN FEBRUARY (false)	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#7
Yes I know.	Jarla	Jun 2013	#9
Because the NY Times article and the facts would have been too fresh in people's memories.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#13
It took the posse two weeks to figure out the law of conspiracy as it relates to whistleblowers.	leveymg	Jun 2013	#52
Big picture? What big picture?	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#56
Dry, very dry. ;-)	leveymg	Jun 2013	#62
It's suddenly an issue because it may implicate Greenwald	jeff47	Jun 2013	#20
But is Snowden's admission really such a surprise?	Jarla	Jun 2013	#22
The surprise is that it destroys the "whistleblower" claims. (nt)	jeff47	Jun 2013	#44
This doesn't	ProSense	Jun 2013	#10
Yes.	Hissyspit	Jun 2013	#12
And he was communicating with him without knowing his name or where he worked.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#14
That's actually an interesting legal question.	Robb	Jun 2013	#48
How could he have possibly encouraged him to do an illegal act when it appears the illegal act had	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#54
But he deleted that Tweet that's still there.	Hissyspit	Jun 2013	#11
I saw some made up shit the other day about a deleted tweet.	The Link	Jun 2013	#15
There is so much made up shit that people like me who have a full-time job, can't keep up	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#42
So Greenwald flew all the way out to China	Life Long Dem	Jun 2013	#16
Bart Gellman of the Washington Post never even met the guy and wrote a PRISM article.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#17
Yeah, he did.	Hissyspit	Jun 2013	#18
it's amazing the lengths that a JOURNALIST will go to secure a story	frylock	Jun 2013	#28
It helps to have the paper behind him	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#58
Kick.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#19
Only people who can't understand plain English. Or pretend not to. /t	Catherina	Jun 2013	#21
The folks you are correcting are not confused on the facts, they are liars	cthulu2016	Jun 2013	#25
No, the confusion are the rubes who think Greenwald just randomly installs encryption systems	KittyWampus	Jun 2013	#27
do you even KNOW what PGP is?	frylock	Jun 2013	#29
LOL!	KittyWampus	Jun 2013	#32
i'll take that as a "no, i don't know fuckall about encryption"	frylock	Jun 2013	#37
Unbelievably odd interpretation of what investigative journalists do.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#35
in a garage? really?!!	frylock	Jun 2013	#38
Did the garage have boxes in it?	DesMoinesDem	Jun 2013	#59
The real question is why a supposed "investigative reporter" didn't already have PGP installed?	baldguy	Jun 2013	#47
and that is a valid question	frylock	Jun 2013	#49
I honestly think that Greenwald never expected to be a go-to reporter for classified documents...	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#55
Woodward and Bernstein met a stranger in a garage.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#34
why they just type out words spoon-fed to them by the establishment..	frylock	Jun 2013	#43
they don't seem very bright or tech savvy imho	frylock	Jun 2013	#30
and THEY (the others) don't seem to be very tethered to the reality based community.	KittyWampus	Jun 2013	#31
one person's reality is another person's fanatasy..	frylock	Jun 2013	#41
Yes, he does. He was communicating with the traitor in February. Whether he knew the name or not	KittyWampus	Jun 2013	#26
He should have had encryption software all along and investigative journalists communicate with	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#33
Thanks for pointing that out.	ucrdem	Jun 2013	#46
i'm not in your party, i just vote a straight dem ticket..	frylock	Jun 2013	#50
Recommend... Thanks for doing the NYT Article in numbered points!	KoKo	Jun 2013	#39
You are welcome, Koko.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#40
Greenwald doesn't have a timeline problem, he has a serious legal problem	ucrdem	Jun 2013	#45
As usual,	Hissyspit	Jun 2013	#53
Post removed	Post removed	Jun 2013	#57
you really think that?	Whisp	Jun 2013	#60
i will say #3 certainly gives me some affinity w/greenwald	arely staircase	Jun 2013	#61
Me too!	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#63
it is funny how little bits of real human experience come through in these things	arely staircase	Jun 2013	#65
Aw! Nice post! I'd bet we'd get along well in real life, too.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#66
Every time that other OP rises to the top. I'm kicking this.	Luminous Animal	Jun 2013	#64

Response to Luminous Animal (Original post)

Tue Jun 25, 2013, 01:05 PM

senseandsensibility (14,129 posts)

1. I never thought Greenwald would lie about the timeline like that

He knows that all of his words will be examined and that the corporate media is just waiting to pounce on any inconsistency. Say what you will about him, but he is not stupid.

Greenwald does not have a timeline problem. The NY Times as the story broke:

1. I never thought Greenwald would lie about the timeline like that

24. oh senseandsensibility you are so right!!!

2. Kick.

3. are you trying to confuse people with facts??

4. It's a cryin' shame that DUers are now capable of being confused with facts.

8. We've Been Dumbed-Down Considerably Over The Years...

23. That's the problem with a big tent

36. sometimes vermin crawls under the tent flaps

5. I guess the attack posse will have to pivot back to the "boxes in the garage"

51. I still think there's milage in the "Poledancing girlfriend" angle - she needs more investigation.

6. We've already known for two weeks about Greenwald's "timeline problem"

7. People are insinuating that he knew who Snowden was IN FEBRUARY (false)

9. Yes I know.

13. Because the NY Times article and the facts would have been too fresh in people's memories.

52. It took the posse two weeks to figure out the law of conspiracy as it relates to whistleblowers.

56. Big picture? What big picture?

62. Dry, very dry. ;-)

20. It's suddenly an issue because it may implicate Greenwald

22. But is Snowden's admission really such a surprise?

44. The surprise is that it destroys the "whistleblower" claims. (nt)

10. This doesn't

12. Yes.

14. And he was communicating with him without knowing his name or where he worked.

48. That's actually an interesting legal question.

54. How could he have possibly encouraged him to do an illegal act when it appears the illegal act had

11. But he deleted that Tweet that's still there.

15. I saw some made up shit the other day about a deleted tweet.

42. There is so much made up shit that people like me who have a full-time job, can't keep up

16. So Greenwald flew all the way out to China

17. Bart Gellman of the Washington Post never even met the guy and wrote a PRISM article.

18. Yeah, he did.

28. it's amazing the lengths that a JOURNALIST will go to secure a story

58. It helps to have the paper behind him

19. Kick.

21. Only people who can't understand plain English. Or pretend not to. /t

25. The folks you are correcting are not confused on the facts, they are liars

27. No, the confusion are the rubes who think Greenwald just randomly installs encryption systems

29. do you even KNOW what PGP is?

32. LOL!

37. i'll take that as a "no, i don't know fuckall about encryption"

35. Unbelievably odd interpretation of what investigative journalists do.

38. in a garage? really?!!

59. Did the garage have boxes in it?

47. The real question is why a supposed "investigative reporter" didn't already have PGP installed?

49. and that is a valid question

55. I honestly think that Greenwald never expected to be a go-to reporter for classified documents...

34. Woodward and Bernstein met a stranger in a garage.

43. why they just type out words spoon-fed to them by the establishment..

30. they don't seem very bright or tech savvy imho

31. and THEY (the others) don't seem to be very tethered to the reality based community.

41. one person's reality is another person's fanatasy..

26. Yes, he does. He was communicating with the traitor in February. Whether he knew the name or not

33. He should have had encryption software all along and investigative journalists communicate with

46. Thanks for pointing that out.

50. i'm not in your party, i just vote a straight dem ticket..

39. Recommend... Thanks for doing the NYT Article in numbered points!

40. You are welcome, Koko.

45. Greenwald doesn't have a timeline problem, he has a serious legal problem

53. As usual,

60. you really think that?

61. i will say #3 certainly gives me some affinity w/greenwald

63. Me too!

65. it is funny how little bits of real human experience come through in these things

66. Aw! Nice post! I'd bet we'd get along well in real life, too.

64. Every time that other OP rises to the top. I'm kicking this.